And the responses to the above at the same link http://vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayAr...spx?id=472
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Im a Vijayvaani regular & always find your articles interesting - be it in this portal, The Pioneer or The Organiser. But I must say did not like this one. Varun must not be held responsible for anything his parents did. Pranam. Â
 Kuna MohantyÂ
 30 Mar 2009Â
 Â
 Sandhya Ji, Your article has about 3/4th of the content that has nothing to do with Varun Gandhi, but only menat to create a negative reading energy which you then somehow divert towards him. You begin with LK Advani's pseudo-secularism of visiting Dargah and his PM-ambitions, then go into Sanjay Gandhi's bio, and ineffectiveness of Maneka Gandhi, and then divert all of it onto Varun Gandhi. What has his speech to do with Sanjay and Emergency? "pakad pakad ke nasbandi" is a phrase you coyly attributed to Varun. I have not come across any video/audio/text attributed to Varun where he referred to it. Can you provide that for your readers? You imagine his wearing a black Kurta/ Sherwani on that rural-speech, was to do with projecting his Nehru identity? (where was the rose?) That is Funny to say the least! The audience was a rural setting and none that he was saying was in anyway in mould of Nehru!! In fact he even mocked Nehru-Gandhi pacifism saying "Koi Ek Thappad Maare...Gaal aage...bewakoofi kii baat". Sorry but your assertion that he wanted to project his nehru identity with his dress does seem like a long stretch of an anyway weak argument. Equally funny was your appeal to "Hindu Ethics", and mentioned Rajputs and Shivaji!! You ignored Maharana Pratap's treatment of his fellow Rajput Mansingh when the latter arrived in Udaipur to negotiate the terms of truce on behalf of Moghals. Pratap demonstrated how a proud Hindu should behave when he not only refused to receive Mansingh or dine with him, but also had his associates heap insults on him by calling him a "saraputa" (son of brother of wife) of a musalman. Also read Pratap's own words in his letters that are available and check out the politically correct Hindu Ethics that you are looking for in Varun!! You refer to Shivaji. I am sure you have not read Shivraj Bhushan, for if you would read it you would see there is no comparision of how Bhushan, Shivaji's biographer, used to refer to musalmaans, and how Varun Gandhi did!! If you find Varun's speech offensive, then you would also find Bhushan very repugnant for your taste. By the way, Shivaji never trusted his muslim generals. They were only hired mercenaries and always kept in check, their strength counterbalanced by stronger Maratha warriors in each of the muslim troops. Sandhyaji, being an avid reader and admiorer of ALL that you write, this article comes as a rude disappointment. unexpected from you. Namaste.Â
 SÂ
 30 Mar 2009<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dharmics should NOT be asked to accept 'living with' christoislamism in Bharatam when it has literally been genociding them. There is simply no such option as 'living with' christoislamism: the only choices given us are
1) waiting until christoislamism roots Dharma out (that is, we can play host to the parasite <- maybe this is the meaning of 'living with' - one lives with cancer too, right, until it kills you?) OR
2) trying to depossess the sheepish ummah.
Appreciate the refs to Shivaji and Pratap by commenter "S" above. Dharmics don't have to hear how earlier Hindu warriors learnt to 'live with' christoislamism. There is nothing sensible about such an action even if they *had* been guilty of such unacceptable/complete compromise (which they weren't). In any case, Hindus today need not act in such a way. The time for unrealistically expecting and hence waiting for christoislamics themselves to change christoislamism's inextricable and in-built intolerance is long over. People the world over know better now: that the terrorist history of the Ideologies Of Terrorism continues in the present precisely because they are unchangeable. Hence it is do or die with christoislamism. Resistance and refusal to submit is the only way to deal with it (whereas submission involves psecularising and 'living with' when we are majority, and converting to christoislamism or dying when we are minority).
We can't remain militantly pacifist (Gandhian pseudo-ahimsa) when christoislamism promises to destroy us and when it repeatedly implements its promised destructiveness. It is every creature's instinct to rise up against what would destroy them. This reaction is natural and must not be curtailed by unnatural allegiance to pretty theories of coexistence with intolerance. Even *if* we could not point to Hindu forbears, there is always the example of the GrecoRomans' resistance (Julian and comrades being just one instance thereof), Persians', Africans', Arabians' and Native Americans' resistance to christoislamism. And even were there no examples at all, it is never too early to start realising that Intolerant Ideologies must be fought and ended.
Hindus are not cowards and will not forever remain blinkered by the theories of how Amity With Intolerant Ideologies May Someday Be Possible After All. Because: No it is not and never will be possible (not for want of our trying). The sooner Dharmics across the board realise this, the more likely our chances of surviving.
Dharmics ought to actually be planning how to give impetus to christoislamics in the subcontinent reverting to their ancestral Dharmic traditions.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Im a Vijayvaani regular & always find your articles interesting - be it in this portal, The Pioneer or The Organiser. But I must say did not like this one. Varun must not be held responsible for anything his parents did. Pranam. Â
 Kuna MohantyÂ
 30 Mar 2009Â
 Â
 Sandhya Ji, Your article has about 3/4th of the content that has nothing to do with Varun Gandhi, but only menat to create a negative reading energy which you then somehow divert towards him. You begin with LK Advani's pseudo-secularism of visiting Dargah and his PM-ambitions, then go into Sanjay Gandhi's bio, and ineffectiveness of Maneka Gandhi, and then divert all of it onto Varun Gandhi. What has his speech to do with Sanjay and Emergency? "pakad pakad ke nasbandi" is a phrase you coyly attributed to Varun. I have not come across any video/audio/text attributed to Varun where he referred to it. Can you provide that for your readers? You imagine his wearing a black Kurta/ Sherwani on that rural-speech, was to do with projecting his Nehru identity? (where was the rose?) That is Funny to say the least! The audience was a rural setting and none that he was saying was in anyway in mould of Nehru!! In fact he even mocked Nehru-Gandhi pacifism saying "Koi Ek Thappad Maare...Gaal aage...bewakoofi kii baat". Sorry but your assertion that he wanted to project his nehru identity with his dress does seem like a long stretch of an anyway weak argument. Equally funny was your appeal to "Hindu Ethics", and mentioned Rajputs and Shivaji!! You ignored Maharana Pratap's treatment of his fellow Rajput Mansingh when the latter arrived in Udaipur to negotiate the terms of truce on behalf of Moghals. Pratap demonstrated how a proud Hindu should behave when he not only refused to receive Mansingh or dine with him, but also had his associates heap insults on him by calling him a "saraputa" (son of brother of wife) of a musalman. Also read Pratap's own words in his letters that are available and check out the politically correct Hindu Ethics that you are looking for in Varun!! You refer to Shivaji. I am sure you have not read Shivraj Bhushan, for if you would read it you would see there is no comparision of how Bhushan, Shivaji's biographer, used to refer to musalmaans, and how Varun Gandhi did!! If you find Varun's speech offensive, then you would also find Bhushan very repugnant for your taste. By the way, Shivaji never trusted his muslim generals. They were only hired mercenaries and always kept in check, their strength counterbalanced by stronger Maratha warriors in each of the muslim troops. Sandhyaji, being an avid reader and admiorer of ALL that you write, this article comes as a rude disappointment. unexpected from you. Namaste.Â
 SÂ
 30 Mar 2009<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dharmics should NOT be asked to accept 'living with' christoislamism in Bharatam when it has literally been genociding them. There is simply no such option as 'living with' christoislamism: the only choices given us are
1) waiting until christoislamism roots Dharma out (that is, we can play host to the parasite <- maybe this is the meaning of 'living with' - one lives with cancer too, right, until it kills you?) OR
2) trying to depossess the sheepish ummah.
Appreciate the refs to Shivaji and Pratap by commenter "S" above. Dharmics don't have to hear how earlier Hindu warriors learnt to 'live with' christoislamism. There is nothing sensible about such an action even if they *had* been guilty of such unacceptable/complete compromise (which they weren't). In any case, Hindus today need not act in such a way. The time for unrealistically expecting and hence waiting for christoislamics themselves to change christoislamism's inextricable and in-built intolerance is long over. People the world over know better now: that the terrorist history of the Ideologies Of Terrorism continues in the present precisely because they are unchangeable. Hence it is do or die with christoislamism. Resistance and refusal to submit is the only way to deal with it (whereas submission involves psecularising and 'living with' when we are majority, and converting to christoislamism or dying when we are minority).
We can't remain militantly pacifist (Gandhian pseudo-ahimsa) when christoislamism promises to destroy us and when it repeatedly implements its promised destructiveness. It is every creature's instinct to rise up against what would destroy them. This reaction is natural and must not be curtailed by unnatural allegiance to pretty theories of coexistence with intolerance. Even *if* we could not point to Hindu forbears, there is always the example of the GrecoRomans' resistance (Julian and comrades being just one instance thereof), Persians', Africans', Arabians' and Native Americans' resistance to christoislamism. And even were there no examples at all, it is never too early to start realising that Intolerant Ideologies must be fought and ended.
Hindus are not cowards and will not forever remain blinkered by the theories of how Amity With Intolerant Ideologies May Someday Be Possible After All. Because: No it is not and never will be possible (not for want of our trying). The sooner Dharmics across the board realise this, the more likely our chances of surviving.
Dharmics ought to actually be planning how to give impetus to christoislamics in the subcontinent reverting to their ancestral Dharmic traditions.